If you benefit and learn from the FDP and enjoy our site, please help support us and become a Contributing Member or make a Donation today! The FDP counts on YOU to help keep the site going with an annual contribution. It's quick and easy with PayPal. Please do it TODAY!

There are still folks around who believe BF is better. So the myth carries on. For many of us who own both models, we know better. The SF amps are great amps and better built than any Fender amp since about 1983-on. It holds its own just fine against a BF amp.

I sold the Pro Reverb that I got from you about 2 years ago. The guy I sold it to had an old '66 Pro Reverb just like it. His was well used and repaired many times. He was going throw a bunch of $$$ into it and still have what looked like a piece of crap. I told him about mine and he had to have it right then. I do miss it now.

Problem is, blackface era amps are uber collectible, and expensive. Out if reach and impractiCal for this gigging musician.
I've used various 90's and newer Fender amps with good result, and I consider using a nice silverface amp a real vintage treat

"No myth here. I'll take the blackface every time. I've owned both and "blackfaced" more than a few silverface amps."

bla bla bla....

Not to be a douche... But Yes it's a Myth... In many models, there were NO changes besides the faceplate or a resistor value here or there. The real change came much later. (and that means construction materials too.) Open a 1970 Deluxe, Vibrolux, Super etc not much difference in the layout from a BF era amp. 1968-69 are the only years that Fender really changed the schematics and then changed them back or close to the originals. You want to point to a component value change of say a slope resistor going from say 85k to a 100k and purpose a BF is $2k more in value and also sounds better... I'll think your nuts. Or when Fender went to the plastic insulated wire (Cheap wire... your words not mine) Why did they do that? Because they insulated better than cloth. They were trying to cut corners and not dress lead lines etc. So which wire insulates better, the BF cloth or the SF plastic? ) Or you want to point to leads not being neatly dressed... WHEN THERE IS NO AUDIO HUM (as in most SF era amps) and think a BF sounds better? Again I'll think your nuts ( If ya can't hear any interference ... then IMO "performance wise..." having the lines dressed or not is a moot point) Unless ya want to stare at the inside of the amp all day... then ya sure ya got a valid point...

Oh and a 5u4GB Ummm... That's a rectifier that sags and causes the amp to break up earlier than a BF' GZ34... it's kinda much more preferred in today's music don't ya think...?

Ge...e use a rectifier that as far as voltage output is as close to SS rectification as you can get, or use a rectifier that sags and causes early break up. Today,,, Most people not into SS rectification would go for the 5u4gb.

"Or you want to point to leads not being neatly dressed... WHEN THERE IS NO AUDIO HUM (as in most SF era amps) and think a BF sounds better?"

Not to be a douche, but you have your opinion and I have mine. There wasn't a problem with hum from the lead dress, there was a problem with parasitic oscillation. This is why they used the parasitic suppression caps.

(This message was last edited by slider313 at 03:38 PM, Jun 15th, 2017)

Fender was trying to reduce distortion in their amps. The SF changes were in the works while Leo was still there.

The Phase Inverter was changed. Lowered resistance to reduce PI distortion...the biggest part of "power amp distortion" as the PI breaks up before the power tubes, and the power tubes amplify that distortion.

Due to increased difficulty in the supply of 5AR4/GZ34 rectifier tubes, Fender switched to the more available 5U4. Since the 5U4 has more voltage drop, Fender increased the power of the power transformer, although this increase is not noted on schematics. 5AR4 availibilty has gotten better due to current tube manufacturers. The change to 5U4's does not really affect tone, as the same voltages are maintained.

The switch from solid wire to stranded did introduce the chance of parasitic oscillation so suppression caps were added, and they cut highs around 6k and up, but affect lower trebles. I've removed them from many amps without problems.

Remove the caps and then monitor the output transformer temp when you play the amp. The oscillations are not really audible, but will cause the transformer to heat up if present.

The bias circuit was changed from bias adjust, to bias balance. Most who blackface SF amps change it back. Better to leave the balance (which is set by ear to the least hum) and simply add a bias adjust.

In most SF Fenders there is a 15k resistor soldered to the body of the bias control. Replace that with a 20k pot in series with a 5k resistor. I use a multiturn trimpot.

(Remove the ground wires from the power tube sockets and solder in 1 ohm metal film or oxide resistors to make an easy way to measure the bias. Measure the voltage from pin 8 to ground, across the new resistor, and it will equal the milliamps the tube is drawing.

One problem with the wiring is how much wire they used. One tech I know shortened the stranded wire, just taking out excess, and removed almost 2 feet. The owner wanted a quieter amp and was rather anal about it. I do like that some of the new wire is shielded.

(This tech ended up even moving the tone control components to the controls, as per the customer's orders.)

The SF changes tightened the amps up and removed some of the "sparkle" and complexity of the blackface amps. Blackfacing is not extreme, but is generally accepted as a positive thing. I have done a LOT of SF amps.

One positive thing is the SF reverb changes. I have not met anyone who changed the circuitry to BF specs. (SF is slightly stronger and fuller...slightly....)

For the most part yes, the '65 RI amps follow the BF circuit. There are a few "updates" for UL approval etc. They are however built on PC boards not hand wired as the originals. Close enough for horse shoes and hand grenades for most folk.

The Custom '68 amps follow the BF circuit on the vib/trem channel and have more of a tweed tone stack in the normal (custom) channel. They have reverb and trem on both channels (DR and TR). The PR being a single channel amp sounds more tweed/brown face to me. I don't own one but have heard it in a band setting mic'd up and it was quite nice actually. Maybe a bit bright but that may have been the guitarist's choice of tone settings.

I think the look of the drip edge '68 amps is just perfect. The molding sparkles, the faceplate sparkles and so does the grill. Short of blonde tolex with an oxblood grill these may be the best looking amps Fender ever built, vintage or current.

Not to Troll, but I have had BF and SF amps and it depends on the model and it depends on the actual amp. (all amps are different especially vintage amps)

Right now I have a mint (came with the owners manual anyone ever see a 70's Twin Reverb owners manual? Not me before.. lol ) 75 Twin Reverb and I had it Black Faced (not just the bias) and that amp is one of the best sounding Twin Reverbs I've ever heard (BF or SF) and the inside is clean as clean can be.... and yes Factory dressed lead lines..

So many misconceptions about Silverfaces.. Black Face amps are great... but Silverfaces are right up there too.

Interesting that you would say that...my experience is that Blackface knob screws, especially early model ones, are slotted. I just finished repairing a 1964 Super Reverb for an old customer of mine, all original, and it has slotted screws. Not sure I'd bank on using the knobs as a sure fire way to ID an amp as BF vs SF.

Moderators: Chris GreeneIron Manreverendrob
FDP, LLC Privacy Policy: Your real name, username, and email
are held in
confidence and not disclosed to any third parties, sold, or used for
anything other than FDP Forum registration unless you specifically
authorize disclosure.